Whitetail calibers that "plow though brush"???

[E=MC^2]

I'm sure most of us would describe a "brush gun" as one that is faster handling, lighter weight, and probably shorter in design than a conventional length rifle. But during another recent Whitetail hunting trip to my hometown I frequently heard "brush gun" refer to the caliber of the firearm. This was usually brought up in conversations at the local saloons and restaurants describing the traits of the ol' 30-30 lever-guns and how they can "plow through brush" on their way to the deer. To me, the usually flat and exposed-lead bullets would probably become more deformed and diverted than any other possible bullet design.

Two nights ago I came across a steel-receivered Browning BLR Model 81 in .243. This was something that had been on my 'list' for a few years so I bought it. I was once again reminded of this "brush gun" concept yesterday when I told a fellow co-worker about my new toy and it's caliber. He said, "The .243. Good caliber, but they don't do very well in the woods." Now, I have taken dozens of whitetails with .243's over the years. Am I the only one that's not shooting through trees and sticks? He commented how his preferred cartidge was the 30-'06 and that it does a much better job at this.

I'll admit, I have taken game and noticed twigs that had been hit on the way to the target but the 'exploding bullet' effect that's been attatched to the 6mm calibers has never occured. In fact, I would think my all-copper Barnes-X's would probably stand up better than my friend's .30-06 Balistic Tips, given the same amount of obsticles.

I'm wondering if the term "plow through brush" is just related to hunters in northern MN or is it used commonly throughout the world. I'd believe most hunters would wait until a clean shot presents itself. If not, are there actually some that believe a bullet will maintain enough effective design and energy to actually take critters on the other sides of trees? If so, what diameter tree would they consider max for a clean shot? Or how much brush?

Thanks! This was a venting post but I'd love to hear feedback.



FWIW-My current whitetail rifle is a Win 70 in .308, mostly because of reloading componants. It kills them no 'deader' than the .243's did in my past.

 

[Fatelvis]

The ability of any bullet to accurately "plow" through brush, and hit its mark, is directly relative to how close the brush is to the target. If the bullet strikes the brush a couple feet in front of the target, it will not be deflected nearly as much, as if the bullet encountered the brush early on in its flight.

 

[Guntalk]

In my experience, the term "Plow through brush" is used by those who don't have a clue.

Nothing will plow through brush and stay on target reliably. One time it might, and the next time it won't.

The key is that the bullet most likely will not keep going straight.

For hunting in brush, I prefer a good, low-power scope on a rifle chambered for a flat-shooting cartridge, so I can find a hole through the brush to shoot through.

I've hit brush with a .450 Marlin, cut down a small tree with it (really), and missed the bull moose standing behind it. I also hit a limb with a .300 Jarrett shooting a 200-grain Nosler partition at 3000 fps MV, and it hit the buck standing three feet behind it, but the bullet hit the buck sideways! It was already tumbling.

Find a hole to shoot through.

 

[cookhj]

what guntalk said. there was an article in some gun rag a while back, and they did a test on "brush guns." i believe the calibers that were tested were a .22-250, .30-30, .30-06, .45-70, a 12 ga slug, and a .69 cal round ball. if i remember correctly, the .69 was the most accurate after having punched through brush a few feet in front of the target. almost all of the others went wild after going through.

 

[ChairborneRanger]

One hears that term in northern Wisconsin and the U. P of Michigan quite a bit, too. IMHO, relatively slower, heavier bullets are quite a bit better at 'bucking brush' than fast, light-weight, bullets. I know one individual who uses a .45-70----it truly is incredible the amount of brush he can shoot through----some of us have half-jokingly referred to it as his 'pulp wood cutter'.

 

[Mannlicher]

Maybe a 120mm M1Abrams gun is a brush buster, but not much else is. The thought that hunting rifles can shoot through interveining brush is a 'rural myth'

 

[45Badger]

What Guntalk said, with exclamation points. The deflection argument may have a SMALL amount of validity at the extreme ranges of mass/velocity ratios.

.55 grain bullet travelling at 4000 fps probably would be less stable (prone to upset/deflection by hihhitng a 1/4" twig) than 1 oz shotgun slug moving at 1200 fps. Probably.

I'm sure we all have an uncle who shot a .243 through ten yards of scrub and nailed Bambi's dad. And a brother whose 40 yard broadside shot with a 12 gauge was sent skyward (hit a neighbors dog 600 yards away) by hitting a twig.

Remember remember high school physics.

 

[mete]

ANY bullet can be deflected. I've had a 6.5x55, 140gr and a 44mag 225 gr,45-70 300gr deflect. Though I hunt in an area that most shots are within 50 yds I use a scope so I can find an opening through the brush. Yes some will deflect more than others but it's smart to understand that since any bullet can be delected avoid the brush. The variables are bullet weight, caliber, velocity, sectional density, twist rate

 

[Preacherman]

First, any and all bullets will be deflected on hitting brush (yes, even a 120mm. APFSDS from an M1 Abrams! ) However, lighter, faster bullets will tend to deflect more than slower, heavier bullets, in my experience. That's not a scientific claim: but in combat, where my buddies were shooting (with 5.56 x 45) at ambushers behind bushes, they might take half a magazine or more to put one round into the ambusher. I stuck with a good old FN in 7.62 x 51, and found that one or two rounds through a similar bush often sufficed to stop the fight immediately. They did deflect, but not so much that they missed the target behind the bush.

In the same way, I've hunted in northern Louisiana's woods for several years now. I've found that the .243, .270 and other high-velocity cartridges deflect rather more than the .30-30 or .308. The least deflection I've encountered has been with .45-70, which is what I'm using this season for brush hunting.

There's an easy way to test this for yourself. Put up a target about 3 feet behind a convenient bush, and shoot at the target through the bush with various calibers. (Replace target as necessary... ) I think you'll find that the lighter, faster stuff is deflected more than the slower, heavier stuff.

 

[Guntalk]

Not a bad idea. I would add something. Put the target 15, 30 and 45 feet behind the brush. You won't have to replace the target very often.

Oh, Preacherman, I hunt in northern Louisiana, too. Have for, oh, 40+ years now. Got my first deer at age 11, in '62, with a .308 in a Winchester Model 100 autoloader, in Tensas Parish.

 

[Mike Irwin]

About 10 years ago a writer by the name of Gary Siuchetti did a very good article on this for American Rifleman magazine. He made a shooting box using dowels to shoot through.

I can't remember his conclusions, but one of them was that the location of the brush in relationion to the shooter and target, as Fatelvis indicates, makes a HUGE difference, obviously.

That would have been published sometime around 1993 or 1994, IIRC.

 

[Larry]

I put targets in the brush and taken shots from various positions and ranges up to 100 yeards. I took shots that I thought I would take while hunting.

I don't shoot through brush at deer any more, and I was using a 375 Winchester. with 220 to 250 gr flat nose bullets.

You either miss the brush and hit the target or hit the brush and hit God knows what.

The only way to figure this stuff out is try it....on targets, not deer. And there is only one answer. There are no brush busting guns.

 

[BigG]

Guntalk summed it up. I would add that people shooting with scopes, especially, fail to notice limbs and twigs intervening betw themselves and the tgt. Those missiles launched without checking the near area for obstructions will probably not land anywhere near where they are aimed.

 

[JShirley]

To me, a brush gun is short and handy, with quick repeat shots- the type of arm I take with me when stalking through the woods, in the afternoons. Killed a running doe through heavy brush with a Mossberg 500 and Rem Reduced Recoil slugs three weeks ago. Fired twice: one slug took the girl in the spine just behind the head; the other took out a perfectly unoffending tree.

Took a nice doe yesterday with a .35 Whelen Rem 700. Scope was dialed down to 1.5X. Lots of people think of the Whelen as a brush gun, because of its high energy and heavy bullet. I don't know if I might have shot through a twig hitting that doe (who was to my left), but when I turned to my right and engaged that doe, the bullet apparently hit a twig en route. So much for it "shooting through" brush. Yeah, it can happen, but don't depend on it. Take the best shot you can, and be prepared to follow up quickly.

John

 

[JohnKSa]

In the article Mike referred to, the amount of deflection was FAR more dependent on the way the bullet struck the intervening material than on the caliber of the bullet.

If the bullet hit the branch squarely, there was a tendency for even the lightest calibers to punch through and continue without too much deflection.

BUT, if the bullet nicked the branch, even a very heavy bullet was significantly deflected. Easily enough to miss a target that wasn't immediately behind the branch.

Which means that bullet deflection is almost entirely a matter of chance (how squarely the bullet hits the branch) and has virtually nothing to do with the caliber or weight of the bullet.

Unfortunately, this topic seems to be one of the many where people refuse to believe empirical evidence. I wonder how many deer have been wounded by people who thought they had a "brush-busting caliber" and therefore felt free to shoot through obstructions...

 

[Nathanael_Greene]

I thought a big part of what made a "brush gun" was its ability to be maneuvered around in brushy territory (twigs and stuff snagging at the barrel, etc.), not so much the bullet's ability to shoot through brush itself.

 

[JShirley]

That's how I feel, in any case. A good brush gun to me might be my 18" bl Mossberg 500.

 

[RustyHammer]

The "plowing through brush attitude" often leads to other hunters getting shot instead of the deer.

If you don't have a clear shot, don't take the shot!

Just my 2-cents.

/Rusty

 

[Black Snowman]

I'll second a vote for the 120 mm APFSDS and add 2.75" flechette rockets and 16" naval cannon.

Short of that I avoid shooting through obstructions.

 

[Sunray]

No .243 will "plow" through brush. Had a 105 soft point literally blow up on a thistle one time. That was the heaviest bullet you could get at the time. .243's do not like bushes between them and the target. Mind you, neither does anything else. Any bullet will be deflected if it hits anything but its intended target.
"plow through brush" is a term used while under the effects of halicingens.

 

[Dr.Rob]

All brush deflects... even a shotgun slug can be redirected by the smallest of impacts.

 

[goon]

I have heard that phrase before, but I think it is BS.
When I hunt in brush, I just pick a hole through the brush to shoot through.

 

[macavada]

When I think of a brush gun, I think of something like a .30-.30. It isn't mean't really for taking 200+ yard shots. It's better used for taking short shots that you would encounter while hunting brushy terrain. If I were hunting from a high stand on fairly open terrain, I want a gun with good ballistics that will be more accurate out to 200 yards. But, if I'm hunting from the ground or on foot in a thick, brushy piece of country, perhaps the "brush gun" is the better choice. I don't think any gun is good at hitting its target after hitting brush. I just think some calibers may be better suited for hunting in areas where you're more likely to take a shorter shot. Make any sense?

Marco

 

[JohnMc]

What Guntalk said PLUS what Rustyhammer said with top emphasis.

It's the clueless who think that a big ole' 200 grain something or other will plow through a tree and the same population (the clueless) are the ones shooting other hunters.

Don't take a shot if you haven't got a clear shot.

Then all the hunters get to go home.

JohnMc